The Catholic Church, in recent years, has faced debates and controversies that have shaken its traditional structures and practices, particularly regarding the concept known as “synodality.

” The term has sparked widespread discussion among clergy and laity alike, yet its meaning remains elusive to many.

In a recent interview, Dr.William Anthony Thomas, a professor and scholar of Mariology based in Rome, provided a detailed and critical perspective on this concept, tracing its origins, implications, and dangers for the Church.

His analysis sheds light on what he perceives as a profound misdirection in the contemporary Church, rooted in an adoption of ideas foreign to Catholic tradition.

According to Dr.Thomas, synodality, which he also refers to as “cidality,” is a concept that gained prominence following interactions between Pope Francis, whom he refers to as “Papa Burggalio,” and Justin Welby, the former Archbishop of Canterbury and head of the Church of England.

The discussion between the two church leaders focused on governance within the Church of England, particularly the use of collegial decision-making methods known as “leoty.

” In response, the Vatican restructured certain offices, transforming the long-established Sacred Congregations into what are now called “dicasteries.

” The term “dicastery” is derived from the Greek word dicastasterion, reflecting this notion of collective decision-making.

While the change in terminology might seem minor, Dr.Thomas emphasized that it signaled a deeper philosophical shift, with implications for the interpretation of authority and governance in the Catholic Church.

Dr.Thomas explained that synodality as practiced today represents a significant departure from traditional Catholic teaching and governance.

He argues that its philosophical underpinnings are heavily influenced by the ideas of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, particularly from Rousseau’s work The Social Contract.

According to Thomas, Rousseau’s philosophy emphasizes sentimentality, emotions, and the prioritization of feelings over objective truth.

In applying these ideas to the Church, synodality promotes a culture where listening to others’ feelings and accommodating emotional sensitivities is prioritized over adherence to doctrinal truth.

Thomas views this shift as a dangerous distortion of Catholic identity and apostolic tradition.

The professor is critical of the notion that synodality is rooted in the Second Vatican Council.

He maintains that the claim is misleading and that the council never intended to introduce a system that replaces divine authority and doctrinal clarity with a governance based on sentimentality and emotional consensus.

He argues that this approach undermines the Church’s mission to proclaim the Gospel with authority and fidelity.

For Thomas, the danger lies in replacing the objective guidance of the Church and the clarity of Christ’s teachings with a subjective, emotion-driven model that accommodates every individual preference and feeling.

Dr.Thomas recounts numerous examples from his own experience within the Vatican to illustrate how synodality operates in practice.

He cites meetings and interactions with high-ranking clerics and points out that many decisions are influenced by personal agendas rather than competence or fidelity to the Catholic faith.

He notes that Pope Francis has prioritized bringing individuals into positions of influence who may lack deep theological knowledge, valuing inclusivity or perceived reformist credentials over doctrinal rigor.

Thomas contrasts this approach with the traditional understanding of the Catholic hierarchy, which relies on apostolic succession, fidelity to the faith, and the cultivation of a disciplined spiritual and intellectual life among clergy.

One of the areas where Thomas sees synodality as particularly harmful is in the Church’s approach to moral teaching.

He argues that a culture of sentimentality discourages the clear proclamation of moral truths.

Rather than addressing sin and the consequences of mortal wrongdoing directly, the emphasis shifts to avoiding offense or hurting feelings.

Thomas believes that this undermines the Church’s pastoral mission, leaving the faithful confused about the consequences of their choices and the reality of salvation.

He draws a parallel between this trend in the Church and modern parenting practices that prioritize avoiding emotional discomfort over teaching discipline and moral clarity, suggesting that both approaches risk producing instability and confusion.

Dr.Thomas also critiques specific instances in which he perceives Pope Francis’ pontificate as undermining the Church’s authority and tradition.

He highlights the pope’s engagement with the Church of England, noting that the Catholic Church does not recognize Anglican ordinations as valid due to breaks in apostolic succession.

Thomas interprets the pope’s deference to Archbishop Welby as an example of misjudgment and a failure to uphold Catholic theological principles.

He extends this critique to broader aspects of the pontificate, including the pope’s interactions with secular authorities and media outlets, as well as administrative decisions that he believes have led to inefficiency and waste.

Central to Thomas’ critique is his argument that synodality introduces a philosophy of governance and ministry divorced from Christ and the Church’s sacramental and doctrinal foundations.

He emphasizes that the Church’s mission is to proclaim the redemptive power of Christ’s death and resurrection and to guide the faithful toward salvation.

By contrast, synodality, in his view, promotes a human-centered approach that emphasizes emotional accommodation over doctrinal fidelity.

He contends that this approach undermines the very purpose of the Church and risks leading believers away from the truths of the faith.

In addressing the laity, Dr.Thomas urges Catholics to actively resist this trend.

He encourages them to write letters to the Vatican, expressing their disagreement with synodality and asserting their desire for a Church led by fidelity to Christ rather than a philosophical or sentimental reinterpretation of governance.

He stresses that while bishops often defer to Rome, the voices of the faithful are a critical component of the Church’s life and can influence its direction if expressed collectively.

Thomas also discusses the broader social and spiritual consequences of synodality and the sentiment-driven approach it promotes.

He links the decline in vocations and the challenges facing Catholic families in Europe to this philosophical shift.

In his view, the destruction of traditional family structures, the emphasis on feelings over truth, and the lack of clear moral and spiritual guidance contribute to a decline in authentic Catholic formation and engagement.

He contrasts this trend with regions where the Church remains strong, attributing vitality to fidelity to doctrine, sacramental life, and disciplined spiritual practice.

Moreover, he critiques what he sees as a widespread permissiveness regarding moral and cultural issues, from bodily modification to the acceptance of controversial social practices.

Thomas interprets these trends as a manifestation of spiritual degradation and an abandonment of traditional moral teaching, exacerbated by a Church leadership that he believes is too influenced by sentimentality and insufficiently grounded in doctrine.

Throughout his discussion, Thomas emphasizes the importance of returning to core Catholic principles: disciplined formation of clergy, fidelity to Scripture and tradition, clear moral teaching, and a renewal of devotion to Christ and the sacraments.

He advocates for a revival of catechesis, authentic Marian devotion, and a focus on the proclamation of the Gospel.

He argues that this revival must be grounded in truth and courage, not in emotional accommodation or bureaucratic consensus.

In reflecting on the current state of the hierarchy, Thomas is particularly critical of bishops who, in his view, lack the backbone to defend the faith against what he sees as unorthodox trends.

He compares modern bishops to jellyfish, lacking spine and direction, in contrast to historical figures who stood firm in fidelity to Christ and the apostolic mission.

He calls for bishops to reclaim their role as leaders and defenders of the faith, to face challenges boldly, and to guide the Church with clarity and courage.

Ultimately, Dr.Thomas frames the debate over synodality not merely as an administrative or philosophical issue but as a fundamental question about the Church’s identity and mission.

He portrays synodality as a departure from divine institution, a human-centered construct that substitutes feelings for truth, and a threat to the Church’s capacity to guide souls toward salvation.

His message is a call to vigilance, active engagement, and a return to principles that prioritize Christ, the sacraments, and doctrinal fidelity over sentiment, compromise, and political or philosophical experimentation.

In conclusion, Dr.William Anthony Thomas presents a stark critique of synodality as it has been interpreted and implemented in recent years.

He argues that it is a philosophy rooted in sentimentality rather than Christology, influenced by secular ideas that distort the Church’s mission.

According to Thomas, synodality undermines clergy formation, moral teaching, and the faithful’s understanding of salvation.

He urges both clergy and laity to resist this trend through active engagement, letters, and public expressions of fidelity to Christ and the Church’s authentic teaching.

For Thomas, the remedy lies in a revival of catechesis, the sacramental life, and disciplined adherence to doctrine, ensuring that the Church remains a beacon of truth and guidance for all who seek to follow Christ.

Without such renewal, he warns, the Church risks succumbing to a sentiment-driven, human-centered model that may erode its spiritual and moral foundations, leaving future generations adrift from the truths that have sustained the Catholic faith for centuries.